And shift the decimal point six places so that it matches regular currencies. No regular currency is divisible to eight places. We talk about thousands or millions or billions of dollars or francs or euros, not megadollars or petafrancs. Millibits or microbits might work for geeks but not for average people.

And shift the decimal point six places so that it matches regular currencies. No regular currency is divisible to eight places. We talk about thousands or millions or billions of dollars or francs or euros, not megadollars or petafrancs. Millibits or microbits might work for geeks but not for average people.

The problem here is: You cannot produce more Bitcoins to cause inflation if they deflate to much (I guess thats what is done with 'regular' money).What would you do if in a couple of years 1 BTC is worth $5000? You would have to pay $50 for your Coffee because there is no smaller value.

And shift the decimal point six places so that it matches regular currencies. No regular currency is divisible to eight places. We talk about thousands or millions or billions of dollars or francs or euros, not megadollars or petafrancs. Millibits or microbits might work for geeks but not for average people.

The problem here is: You cannot produce more Bitcoins to cause inflation if they deflate to much (I guess thats what is done with 'regular' money).What would you do if in a couple of years 1 BTC is worth $5000? You would have to pay $50 for your Coffee because there is no smaller value.

If 1 BTC = $5000, I assume you are talking about the current BTC worth roughly $20 currently increasing in value by a factor of 250x. That doesn't take into account the shift of six decimal places I mentioned. In such a case, a $2 cup of coffee would cost .0004 old BTC or 400.00 new BTC .

If you are talking about an increase in value of 250,000,000x, I think that is unreal! But if it did happen, maybe with the use of BTCs as a pan-Galactic currency, then it wouldn't be too hard to shift the decimal point another six or ten places as needed.

Observation, a Funny thing about Calling them "Bit's", Money has already been called "Bit's", and that it was a division of 8 Bits to a Whole 'Spanish Milled Dollar", The Bitcoin divisible to an 8th decimal... https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Bit_%28money%29 and there's a link to Bitcoin at the Bottom of the Page... It's a No-Brainer... LOL

I don't have any idea for what to call Satoshi instead of Satoshi. Instead I'd like to start a habit to lump bitcoins into group of eights and call them 'bytecoins' or 'bytes'. It's much cooler to say I have three bytes than two dozens of bitcoins... right?

Well, to be honest I'm just spamming to get past this great spam-preventing newbie restriction.

Since it's a digital currency my mind warps right back to the original Tron (I'm such a geek) where everything was "bits" and "bytes", therefore everything that is a sub-BitCoin is a Byte or ByteCoin.

But a Byte is made up of 8 bits soooo this makes no sense for the geeks among us. When talking bits and bytes...bits are smaller.

On another note we can refer to 8 BTC as a BYTE!!!! 1024 BTC = a KILOBYTE etc. etc. Bet no one thought of that yet!

Millionnaires and billionnaires will be replaced with Bytennaires and Kilobytennaires LoL Can't wait to see who becomes the world's first Megabytennaire (1,048,576 BTC)

You got math in my geek logic. ~

I know the mathematical breakdown doesn't add up (ha) but I was going for more of the asthetic of the naming convention. I was trying to avoid the 8 sub decimal naming schemes that keeps cropping up. Interesting and well thought out as they may be, but for the mainstream to get on board I would think that we need to keep it with a "dollars & cents" mindset.

It will make the assimilation....errr...I mean..."migration" process, of the average users a bit easier if it's in a format they can already identify with. Therefore, Bits and Bytes.

And shift the decimal point six places so that it matches regular currencies. No regular currency is divisible to eight places. We talk about thousands or millions or billions of dollars or francs or euros, not megadollars or petafrancs. Millibits or microbits might work for geeks but not for average people.

This.

What name would you give to the smallest unit of bitcoin (0.00000001)? sat. What name would you give to 100 sats? bit. 1 bit = 1 uBTC. 1,000,000 bits = 1 BTC. It's bits

Trying to keep in line with actual units of measurements in the metric system, since we;re one decimal place off a nanobit, a good compensation would be "ninobit", in my opinion.

But I agree with some posters above, that the decimal should be shifted all the way to the right and not be used. I thinks the fact that bitcoins can be divided so small makes them seem silly to non bitocin users and can hinder their use in the real world, for average people. The decimal really serves no purpose since at the rate the value of BTC is climbing, in the future very few people will even be able to talk about whole bitcoins...

But I agree with some posters above, that the decimal should be shifted all the way to the right and not be used. I thinks the fact that bitcoins can be divided so small makes them seem silly to non bitocin users and can hinder their use in the real world, for average people. The decimal really serves no purpose since at the rate the value of BTC is climbing, in the future very few people will even be able to talk about whole bitcoins...

-Mike

I second using this method. Average people are not accustomed to using currency that is divisible to the 8th decimal place. Such a change would be difficult for people to adapt to.

--Tod

Since all the cool kids are doing it, here is my donation address: 1FZeuMzGy5GZPZofQaReMzq4rzJuyUJvZy. Any amount is welcome.

But I agree with some posters above, that the decimal should be shifted all the way to the right and not be used. I thinks the fact that bitcoins can be divided so small makes them seem silly to non bitocin users and can hinder their use in the real world, for average people. The decimal really serves no purpose since at the rate the value of BTC is climbing, in the future very few people will even be able to talk about whole bitcoins...

-Mike

I second using this method. Average people are not accustomed to using currency that is divisible to the 8th decimal place. Such a change would be difficult for people to adapt to.

--Tod

Agreed. There are many currencies that don't have decimal points now, and they work just fine. See yen, krw, or the Thai Baht (satang is their 'cent' but its so small!).

The base unit of 0.00000001 BTC is the same as 10 nanobitcoins, but I think this will be confusing because we cannot represent 1 nanobitcoin (so how can we have ten of them?). The existing usage seems to work well enough:

The base unit of 0.00000001 BTC is the same as 10 nanobitcoins, but I think this will be confusing because we cannot represent 1 nanobitcoin (so how can we have ten of them?). The existing usage seems to work well enough:

0.00000001 BTC (nickname "one Satoshi").

That makes total sense. It's simple, it's easily converted (as most people are familiar with metric system) and the nicknames are totally usable.

As far as the last two digits go, I think the setup you have will work out fine as it is. In the same way most people would say $1.35 as "a dollar, thirty five" people could also say 1.28 uBTC (0.00000128) as "a mike, twenty eight". So a name for the last two digits isn't really necessary. As they are the last two digits, you could call them cents (mike-cents) if you really wanted to. The thing is though, years from now as we approach the point when we actually need a name for those digits, we'll also need a system that works further than 8 decimal points anyway. So before we ever need a common name for the last few digits, the system will already need to have been extended to include nanobitcoins, picobitcoins, etc. Technically, the furthest few digits in the system will never really need a common usage name.

I agree with using the SI system. I think 10 nBTC is fine, would have fitted better with nine decimals though.

Might be nice to give the smallest unit it's own name. I like the following suggestions:microcent (since it's 1/100 [a cent] of a μBTC)credit (standard currency in sci-fi)bitcoin-atom (since they are indivisible)bit (smallest digital unit)

Looking at https://secure.wikimedia.org/wiktionary/en/wiki/bit bit is actually synonymous to coin.1 bit, 10 bits, 100 bits is 1 μBTC, 1 megabit is 1 cent and 100 megabit is 1 BTC. But maybe it's too confusing since bit is used frequently in other contexts.

My guess is that only SI prefixes will be used in the end if not, or as someone suggested, the decimal is removed entirely, so that 0.00000001 "old" btc = 1 "new" btc, it would be as easy as adding a multiplier in the software.